New Register here for RBI, SEBI & NABARD strategy workshop! April 9 at 7 PM

    Question

    It was held by the Court in the case of ________ “it

    is not for litigant to dictate to the Court as to how the proceedings should be conducted, it is for the court to decide what will be the best course to be adopted for expeditious disposal of the case.”
    A Pukhraj D. Jain v. G. Gopalkrishna Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    B M.S.M Sarma v. Sri Krishna Sinha Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    C Salem advocate Bar association vs. UOI. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    D None of the above. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

    Solution

    Pukhraj D. Jain v. G. Gopalkrishna AIR 2004 SC 3504. It was held by the Court that it is not for litigant to dictate to the Court as to how the proceedings should be conducted, it is for the court to decide what will be the best course to be adopted for expeditious disposal of the case.   M.S.M Sarma v. Sri Krishna Sinha AIR 1960 SC 1186 In this case court has discussed the principle underlying s.11 that is res judicata. The present section bars the trial of a suit or an issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has already been adjudicated upon in a previous suit. Moreover, public policy requires that there should be an end of litigation. The question whether the decision is correct or erroneous has no bearing on the question whether it operates or does not operate as res judicata otherwise every decision would be impugned as erroneous and there would be no finality. Salem advocate Bar association vs. UOI AIR 2003.   In this case the amendments made to CPC in 2002 were challenged and the same was held to be not ultra vires to the constitution by hon’ble supreme court.

    Practice Next